The One Man Left clan tournament! - Take 2 incoming on June 25th

[aaronINdayton]

(12-12-2012 09:38 AM)Coolio Wrote:  Idea: say team 1 defeats team 2 with 2 players on team 1 surviving. Those 2 surviving players would be in the 2v2 match against any 2 players that team 2 chooses from their squad.

If team 1 only has 1 surviving player, then that player will be in the 2v2 match against 2 players from team 2 that team 2 chooses. The player to be teammates with the player from team 1 (the survivor) is chosen by team 2.

If team 1 has 3 or more survivors, team 1 gets to choose the two players they want in the 2v2 match against the 2 players team 2 chooses for their 2v2 team.

This may give a little advantage to the team that loses the 1v1 matchups and keep the whole tournament more equal.

What's the point of the 2v2 game in this case? If one team has already lost... then they lost! Would the 2v2 game decide the real winner? Then wouldn't it make sense to lose the 1v1 games so you can pick any two 2v2 players you want?

[lawtai]

forum bump

[Coolio]

(12-12-2012 11:04 PM)aaronINdayton Wrote:  

(12-12-2012 09:38 AM)Coolio Wrote:  Idea: say team 1 defeats team 2 with 2 players on team 1 surviving. Those 2 surviving players would be in the 2v2 match against any 2 players that team 2 chooses from their squad.

If team 1 only has 1 surviving player, then that player will be in the 2v2 match against 2 players from team 2 that team 2 chooses. The player to be teammates with the player from team 1 (the survivor) is chosen by team 2.

If team 1 has 3 or more survivors, team 1 gets to choose the two players they want in the 2v2 match against the 2 players team 2 chooses for their 2v2 team.

This may give a little advantage to the team that loses the 1v1 matchups and keep the whole tournament more equal.

What's the point of the 2v2 game in this case? If one team has already lost... then they lost! Would the 2v2 game decide the real winner? Then wouldn't it make sense to lose the 1v1 games so you can pick any two 2v2 players you want?

I was just throwing out a suggestion. You could possibly have the team winning the 1v1 get a point and the team winnin the 2v2 get a point and if there's a tie than have a third all or nothing game. I know people will say that the 1v1 is harder because you have to win 5 games but I was just suggesting.

Possibly, you could get a point each team you defeat a player. So if team 1 wins with 2 players left they get 5 points because they killed 5 players. But team 2 would get 3 points because they killed 3 of team 1s players. Then the 2v2 could be worth 2 points because you're killing 2 players. This would connect the 1v1 and 2v2 more like Gfich wanted.

[Gf!sh]

I suggest the following:

After 2-3 games are played, either clan may claim the next game to be 2v2. Both clans select 2 players, and the match will be played. Both losing players will be eliminated, and the winning team places one of their 2v2-ers to play the next game, while the other steps back. That one doesn't have to play any games further in the match.

I also want to test this system in a individual match, with a bet . Anyone?

Meanwhile, i came up with a different format (for another tournament, perhaps). Let me call it 'King of the Mountain'. Each clan select 4 or 8 members to face off. They will be put in a elimination-like bracket system, with everyone doing a first round against someone from the opposing clan. losers get eliminated, winners move on. If the next round, two teammates hit eachother, they both proceed, while the opponent for that round (if that is an opponent anyway) has to eliminate both of them in order to proceed. When two pairs, or even larger parties collide, they can either do a 2v2 or make a 'sub-elimination' (decided by votes). The one winning the final game takes it all.

[Szei]

(12-11-2012 11:58 PM)aaronINdayton Wrote:  That'd be cool, except when does the game get played? And when does the player come back to life? Perhaps instead of bringing a player back, the 2v2 winner could seat a 6th player. That way the 2v2 game can start with the first 1v1 game, and only needs to finish before one of the teams hits their 5th seat, and one more person could get involved in the 1v1 matches.

I like this suggestion the most so far. It's simple and helps save time (which is vital in Outwitters tournaments since they can drag on if you have to play game one at a time).

[Mr.Banger]

Agreed with szei haha.

[Gf!sh]

(12-15-2012 08:50 AM)Szei Wrote:  

(12-11-2012 11:58 PM)aaronINdayton Wrote:  That'd be cool, except when does the game get played? And when does the player come back to life? Perhaps instead of bringing a player back, the 2v2 winner could seat a 6th player. That way the 2v2 game can start with the first 1v1 game, and only needs to finish before one of the teams hits their 5th seat, and one more person could get involved in the 1v1 matches.

I like this suggestion the most so far. It's simple and helps save time (which is vital in Outwitters tournaments since they can drag on if you have to play game one at a time).

So, now that I finally seem to understand what he was saying, it seems the best to me. This format doesn't seem really fitting for tournaments though (more for sole matches, time-wise). I'm experimenting a bit with different formats for future tournaments.

Anyways, signups have started! Any clan who wants to compete may enter now! 4 slots!

[Mr.Banger]

iPro would like to sign up.

[aaronINdayton]

Are we doing the pick a player for each round way, or preset-order thing? I think pick a player would be better all around, some people get busy or unbusy which could mess with a pre-ordering. Also, picking a player would be more exciting!

[TheQwertiest]

please post the finalized rules.